I had proof, you had "because I say so", so of course I'm going to believe the proof, no matter the person saying otherwise.

In this case my proof was wrong indeed, but to prove or disprove something it's not enough to say "it is so". Even if you have 20 years experience, I will still expect hard proof instead of believing you blindly.

It's not about the fact the proof was mine, it's about proof over words. Had the proof been by anyone else, I would still have believed it over anyone's words, after running it and witnessing the results.

If there's hard proof the sky is blue, and you get a sky expert telling you it is green, are you going to believe the expert without proof?

Your proof was based on faulty assumptions. Your evidence that /IRQ was asserted at pixel 315 had more in common with proving that a soccer pitch was 86 meters long because you assumed that your measuring tape was accurate. When we pointed out that the rule book said "it's 100m", you denied it, and ultimately required that I go and find your measuring tape and show that it wasn't trustworthy.

Your proof wasn't "hard". It was about as squishy as possible. But you assumed it was correct and when someone told you you were wrong you didn't reevaluate your assumptions.

I'm sorry lidnariq for the recent trouble, really. I though that such MMC3 information was well-known and... trivial. I never stopped development on RockNES, and it's the only one still alive in 20 years (1998-2018).

Your proof wasn't "hard". It was about as squishy as possible. But you assumed it was correct and when someone told you you were wrong you didn't reevaluate your assumptions.

Says who? I checked my calculations after those posts, and found they were correct. I also checked the Scrolling page, and found no indication the effect would be delayed (this is now fixed thanks to tepples). At that point, I indeed expect proof. It is not an insult to your authority that I expect proof, when I have proof showing otherwise.

Quote:

ultimately required that I go and find your measuring tape and show that it wasn't trustworthy.

That's how proof works. It can only be overridden by better proof. Why is that an issue to you?

Well, rather than insisting that you were infallible, you could have instead posted the source and asked politely what was wrong. That would have same the same end result without being combative.

Do you really not understand why I'm harping on humility? It's not like this is the first time that your demeanor of "I'm the smartest most infallible human and everyone else is an idiot" has annoyed me; it's just the first time where I knew it was trivially wrong.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 7 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum